A series of "telling"posts from the 9/11 Free Forums (my bold):
Re: Smart Idiots
On the topic of Smart Idiots.... the 9/11 Truth "fathers" are organizing a "symposium"... I suppose that would be what it would be called... or perhaps a series of presentations... of the evidence the Truth Movement has assembled which appears to undermine the Official Story of the 911 tragedy.
You can expect the familiar faces to present their cases on Sept 8-10 in Toronto on the even of the 10th Anniversary of the 9/11 attack.
I don't imagine anyone from this site aside from Tony has been asked to participate or review the "papers" or presentations.
And why might that be?
BREAK
How is it possible to have an informed discussion on WTC1 and 2 without a working knowledge of ROOSD?
Without using the most current knowledge contained within the WTC Twin Towers Collapse Dynamics, they are just going to spin a bunch of noise.
Most of the posters here know that already. Yet we are a bunch of nobodies "outside" of the "real debate".
Website
BREAK
There is absolutely no doubt that human beings often mistake imaginary mental projections for real things. And of course the same applies to ones own concept of self and experience of "other".
An easy way to see this is by comparing the difference between science and advertising. In advertising there is no desire to cast a realistic image. The point is to caste a false image which sells.
Consumer cultures are all about casting false images to entice the viewer to want. It is like a woman putting on make-up. Total transparency and honesty is not desired or welcome.
...................
With science honesty and sincerity are required. Any effort to "sell" should be viewed with suspicion. One can detect sincerity by how willing others are to correct mistakes once they are pointed out and confirmed.
On that standard, I have never detected this type of honesty within 9-11-01 debate outside this forum. I was kicked out of the STJ911 forum and censored continuously at the govt loyalist site. 9/11 Blogger has no clue what ROOSD is.
Egoism enters all facets of the "debate" so deeply that there is little or no science behind all the advertising. It is like people with little integrity trying to sell used cars. Always pushing false concepts, false images.....always advertising a product rather than being honest with oneself and others.
..........................................
The result is that noise drowns out practical inquiry. Real measurements are shouted down and censored. This is the prevailing atmosphere approaching the 10th anniversary..............noise, advertising and censorship.
Nothing real can push through the noise.
BREAK
I've called the deceptions propaganda in the past but maybe it is better to compare them with modern advertising.
An advertiser will do anything, including bouncing a pair of tits in your face, to get you to want the product. There is no lower limit on how to sell. Modern advertising and corporate PR seem far more advanced than simple propaganda. It is a total effort to sell an image, and the truth has nothing to do with it.
Advertising is everywhere and it doesn't even pretend to be interested in the truth. It intentionally casts false images.
Concerning Richard Gage, I don't detect anything in him that gives a sh*t if an item is true or false. There is no sincere interest in fact or shame when presenting incorrect information.
Or David Chandler. Nothing that seems to inquire deeper or give a sh*t. Extremely superficial, poor observations.
It is a mentality of selling, not sincere inquiry. Like he is advertising some package."
Is the truth movement sufficiently skeptical (of its own "findings) and interested in real scientific inquiry and understanding or is "run" like an advertising campaign....where facts don't matter as much as impressions?
Full Version: Research Or Advertising?
QUOTE (SanderO @ Jun 18 2011, 09:48 PM) 
A series of "telling"posts from the 9/11 Free Forums (my bold):
Re: Smart Idiots
On the topic of Smart Idiots.... the 9/11 Truth "fathers" are organizing a "symposium"... I suppose that would be what it would be called... or perhaps a series of presentations... of the evidence the Truth Movement has assembled which appears to undermine the Official Story of the 911 tragedy.
You can expect the familiar faces to present their cases on Sept 8-10 in Toronto on the even of the 10th Anniversary of the 9/11 attack.
I don't imagine anyone from this site aside from Tony has been asked to participate or review the "papers" or presentations.
And why might that be?
BREAK
How is it possible to have an informed discussion on WTC1 and 2 without a working knowledge of ROOSD?
Without using the most current knowledge contained within the WTC Twin Towers Collapse Dynamics, they are just going to spin a bunch of noise.
Most of the posters here know that already. Yet we are a bunch of nobodies "outside" of the "real debate".
Website
BREAK
There is absolutely no doubt that human beings often mistake imaginary mental projections for real things. And of course the same applies to ones own concept of self and experience of "other".
An easy way to see this is by comparing the difference between science and advertising. In advertising there is no desire to cast a realistic image. The point is to caste a false image which sells.
Consumer cultures are all about casting false images to entice the viewer to want. It is like a woman putting on make-up. Total transparency and honesty is not desired or welcome.
...................
With science honesty and sincerity are required. Any effort to "sell" should be viewed with suspicion. One can detect sincerity by how willing others are to correct mistakes once they are pointed out and confirmed.
On that standard, I have never detected this type of honesty within 9-11-01 debate outside this forum. I was kicked out of the STJ911 forum and censored continuously at the govt loyalist site. 9/11 Blogger has no clue what ROOSD is.
Egoism enters all facets of the "debate" so deeply that there is little or no science behind all the advertising. It is like people with little integrity trying to sell used cars. Always pushing false concepts, false images.....always advertising a product rather than being honest with oneself and others.
..........................................
The result is that noise drowns out practical inquiry. Real measurements are shouted down and censored. This is the prevailing atmosphere approaching the 10th anniversary..............noise, advertising and censorship.
Nothing real can push through the noise.
BREAK
I've called the deceptions propaganda in the past but maybe it is better to compare them with modern advertising.
An advertiser will do anything, including bouncing a pair of tits in your face, to get you to want the product. There is no lower limit on how to sell. Modern advertising and corporate PR seem far more advanced than simple propaganda. It is a total effort to sell an image, and the truth has nothing to do with it.
Advertising is everywhere and it doesn't even pretend to be interested in the truth. It intentionally casts false images.
Concerning Richard Gage, I don't detect anything in him that gives a sh*t if an item is true or false. There is no sincere interest in fact or shame when presenting incorrect information.
Or David Chandler. Nothing that seems to inquire deeper or give a sh*t. Extremely superficial, poor observations.
It is a mentality of selling, not sincere inquiry. Like he is advertising some package."
Is the truth movement sufficiently skeptical (of its own "findings) and interested in real scientific inquiry and understanding or is "run" like an advertising campaign....where facts don't matter as much as impressions?
Re: Smart Idiots
On the topic of Smart Idiots.... the 9/11 Truth "fathers" are organizing a "symposium"... I suppose that would be what it would be called... or perhaps a series of presentations... of the evidence the Truth Movement has assembled which appears to undermine the Official Story of the 911 tragedy.
You can expect the familiar faces to present their cases on Sept 8-10 in Toronto on the even of the 10th Anniversary of the 9/11 attack.
I don't imagine anyone from this site aside from Tony has been asked to participate or review the "papers" or presentations.
And why might that be?
BREAK
How is it possible to have an informed discussion on WTC1 and 2 without a working knowledge of ROOSD?
Without using the most current knowledge contained within the WTC Twin Towers Collapse Dynamics, they are just going to spin a bunch of noise.
Most of the posters here know that already. Yet we are a bunch of nobodies "outside" of the "real debate".
Website
BREAK
There is absolutely no doubt that human beings often mistake imaginary mental projections for real things. And of course the same applies to ones own concept of self and experience of "other".
An easy way to see this is by comparing the difference between science and advertising. In advertising there is no desire to cast a realistic image. The point is to caste a false image which sells.
Consumer cultures are all about casting false images to entice the viewer to want. It is like a woman putting on make-up. Total transparency and honesty is not desired or welcome.
...................
With science honesty and sincerity are required. Any effort to "sell" should be viewed with suspicion. One can detect sincerity by how willing others are to correct mistakes once they are pointed out and confirmed.
On that standard, I have never detected this type of honesty within 9-11-01 debate outside this forum. I was kicked out of the STJ911 forum and censored continuously at the govt loyalist site. 9/11 Blogger has no clue what ROOSD is.
Egoism enters all facets of the "debate" so deeply that there is little or no science behind all the advertising. It is like people with little integrity trying to sell used cars. Always pushing false concepts, false images.....always advertising a product rather than being honest with oneself and others.
..........................................
The result is that noise drowns out practical inquiry. Real measurements are shouted down and censored. This is the prevailing atmosphere approaching the 10th anniversary..............noise, advertising and censorship.
Nothing real can push through the noise.
BREAK
I've called the deceptions propaganda in the past but maybe it is better to compare them with modern advertising.
An advertiser will do anything, including bouncing a pair of tits in your face, to get you to want the product. There is no lower limit on how to sell. Modern advertising and corporate PR seem far more advanced than simple propaganda. It is a total effort to sell an image, and the truth has nothing to do with it.
Advertising is everywhere and it doesn't even pretend to be interested in the truth. It intentionally casts false images.
Concerning Richard Gage, I don't detect anything in him that gives a sh*t if an item is true or false. There is no sincere interest in fact or shame when presenting incorrect information.
Or David Chandler. Nothing that seems to inquire deeper or give a sh*t. Extremely superficial, poor observations.
It is a mentality of selling, not sincere inquiry. Like he is advertising some package."
Is the truth movement sufficiently skeptical (of its own "findings) and interested in real scientific inquiry and understanding or is "run" like an advertising campaign....where facts don't matter as much as impressions?
I will agree you make a lot of vaild points Sander O but you have not responded to the e mail i sent you.
I was out of touch with the internet... I will respond when I have time!
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.